| Message ID | 20230928104334.41215-1-Julia.Lawall@inria.fr (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | f843249cb6a151bfe7b955dfb93ff29663c258fb |
| Headers | show |
| Series | tracing/eprobe: drop unneeded breaks | expand |
On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 12:43:34 +0200 Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> wrote: > Drop break after return. > Good catch! This looks good to me. Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> And Fixes: 7491e2c44278 ("tracing: Add a probe that attaches to trace events") > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> > > --- > kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c | 5 +---- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > index 72714cbf475c..03c851f57969 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > @@ -788,12 +788,9 @@ find_and_get_event(const char *system, const char *event_name) > name = trace_event_name(tp_event); > if (!name || strcmp(event_name, name)) > continue; > - if (!trace_event_try_get_ref(tp_event)) { > + if (!trace_event_try_get_ref(tp_event)) > return NULL; > - break; > - } > return tp_event; > - break; > } > return NULL; > } >
On Fri, 29 Sep 2023, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 12:43:34 +0200 > Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> wrote: > > > Drop break after return. > > > > Good catch! This looks good to me. > > Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> > > And > > Fixes: 7491e2c44278 ("tracing: Add a probe that attaches to trace events") Thanks. I didn't include that because it's not a bug. But it does break Coccinelle, which is how I noticed it. julia > > > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> > > > > --- > > kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c | 5 +---- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > > index 72714cbf475c..03c851f57969 100644 > > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > > @@ -788,12 +788,9 @@ find_and_get_event(const char *system, const char *event_name) > > name = trace_event_name(tp_event); > > if (!name || strcmp(event_name, name)) > > continue; > > - if (!trace_event_try_get_ref(tp_event)) { > > + if (!trace_event_try_get_ref(tp_event)) > > return NULL; > > - break; > > - } > > return tp_event; > > - break; > > } > > return NULL; > > } > > > > > -- > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> >
On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 13:37:08 +0200 (CEST) Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr> wrote: > > > On Fri, 29 Sep 2023, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 12:43:34 +0200 > > Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> wrote: > > > > > Drop break after return. > > > > > > > Good catch! This looks good to me. > > > > Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> > > > > And > > > > Fixes: 7491e2c44278 ("tracing: Add a probe that attaches to trace events") > > Thanks. I didn't include that because it's not a bug. But it does break > Coccinelle, which is how I noticed it. OK, I got it. I thought it may cause a compiler warning because the 'break' never be executed. (maybe it is just a flow-control word, so it may not need to be warned, but a bit storange.) > > julia > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> > > > > > > --- > > > kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c | 5 +---- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > > > index 72714cbf475c..03c851f57969 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > > > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c > > > @@ -788,12 +788,9 @@ find_and_get_event(const char *system, const char *event_name) > > > name = trace_event_name(tp_event); > > > if (!name || strcmp(event_name, name)) > > > continue; > > > - if (!trace_event_try_get_ref(tp_event)) { > > > + if (!trace_event_try_get_ref(tp_event)) > > > return NULL; > > > - break; > > > - } > > > return tp_event; > > > - break; > > > } > > > return NULL; > > > } > > > > > > > > > -- > > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> > >
On Sat, Sep 30, 2023 at 06:19:02PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 13:37:08 +0200 (CEST) > Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 29 Sep 2023, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 12:43:34 +0200 > > > Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> wrote: > > > > > > > Drop break after return. > > > > > > > > > > Good catch! This looks good to me. > > > > > > Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> > > > > > > And > > > > > > Fixes: 7491e2c44278 ("tracing: Add a probe that attaches to trace events") > > > > Thanks. I didn't include that because it's not a bug. But it does break > > Coccinelle, which is how I noticed it. > > OK, I got it. I thought it may cause a compiler warning because the > 'break' never be executed. (maybe it is just a flow-control word, > so it may not need to be warned, but a bit storange.) I don't think GCC warns about unreachable code, but yeah, in Smatch unreachable break statements do not trigger a warning. People like to add extra break statements to switch statements. regards, dan carpenter
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c index 72714cbf475c..03c851f57969 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c @@ -788,12 +788,9 @@ find_and_get_event(const char *system, const char *event_name) name = trace_event_name(tp_event); if (!name || strcmp(event_name, name)) continue; - if (!trace_event_try_get_ref(tp_event)) { + if (!trace_event_try_get_ref(tp_event)) return NULL; - break; - } return tp_event; - break; } return NULL; }
Drop break after return. Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> --- kernel/trace/trace_eprobe.c | 5 +---- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)